VISUALIZED: Why Economic Concerns Will Trump Civil Union Brouhaha

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Mon May 14, 2012 at 14:27 49 MST

Peak news contributor Dave Diepenbrock sends in the below graph of the number of working age Coloradans who can't find work. With over one in four Colorado adults out of a job, why are we focused on civil unions during the special session?

(Note: Data derived from Colorado LMI, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) Unit)

(Note: 2012 employment data from March 2012, seasonally adjusted; annual data used for previous years)

SPECIAL SESSION OVERREACH: Hickenlooper And Democrats' Focus On Social Issue Could Backfire

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Mon May 14, 2012 at 11:32 17 MST

For years, Colorado Democrats successfully blistered Colorado Republicans for focusing too heavily on divisive social issues in the Legislature. With Governor Hickenlooper calling for a special session on one of those social issues, at the cost of $23,500 per day, the shoe is now firmly on the other foot.

While many political observers have said there is no risk to Hickenlooper in calling a special session, we're not so sure. There is no emergency when it comes to civil unions, nor most importantly, will any jobs be created from passing it. Coloradans, no matter where they stand on civil unions, are unlikely to appreciate their government using limited tax revenue to argue for a few more days over a bill that most think has no chance of passing. 

In fact, recent national polling shows less than 1% of respondents say the social issue is their top concern. Reports Gallup:

We know that values issues, like same-sex marriage, are low on an overall priority list for the average American. We just finished our May update wherein we ask Americans to name the most important problem facing the country. Two-thirds mentioned some aspect of the economy. Less than 1% specifically mentioned issues relating to gay rights or gay marriage. Even when we asked Americans in the same poll to tell us what worries them about the state of moral values in this country, very few mention gay issues.

From a big picture perspective, the economy rules. The direction of the economy in the next four months is going to have a much greater impact on the outcome of the election than Obama’s public announcement that he supports legalizing same-sex marriage. [Peak emphasis]

With news this morning that Speaker McNulty has assigned the civil unions bill to the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, the bill is likely to die immediately, thus avoiding a repeat of the procedural skirmish witnessed last week.

Since calling a special session appears to have done nothing for the bill, many Coloradans will likely wonder why Governor Hickenlooper is bothering wasting taxpayer money on it. With unemployment still perilously high in Colorado and gas prices over $4/gallon in parts of the state, a focus on social issues isn't likely where voters want to see their government put its energy and money.

Mitt Romney's campaign has also picked up this line, hitting back at the obsession with social issues by Democrats and the press in Colorado. We're betting most voters, regardless of their position on gay marriage or civil unions, are in agreement with Romney that the debate is merely a distraction from the economy, which voters continually cite as their top concern. 

Closer to home, conservative advocacy group Compass Colorado is piling on this argument, blasting out robocalls hitting Hickenlooper for wasting taxpayer time and money on divisive social issues, rather than more essential economic development issues. 

“Reasonable people can disagree over civil unions and same-sex marriage,” said Tyler Q. Houlton, president of Compass Colorado. “But all hardworking Colorado taxpayers agree that Governor Hickenlooper should put job creation ahead of his divisive social agenda.”

Houlton's argument about priorities is Hickenlooper and Democrats' fundamental problem. It's not that their position is out of whack with voters, it's that their focus is.

WORST WEEK IN DENVER: Joe Miklosi's Campaign Had Its Toughest Seven Day Stretch Yet

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Fri May 11, 2012 at 14:23 03 MST

State Rep Joe Miklosi's campaign for Congress in CD6 has never really had a good week, but this week is the worst yet. He was listed as a "Loser" by The Denver Post, a report revealed he stiffed a staff member of pay and The Washington Post can't even spell his name right.

From The Denver Post's legislative session Scorecard (not available online):

LOSERS
Rep. Joe Miklosi: The Aurora Democrat, who is running in the 6th Congressional District, was slammed after pushing a bill designed to prevent discrimination against people in biker clothing. Critics said the bill, which failed, was a shameless pander to certain voters, including veterans. He also sponsored a bill to enact a sales-tax holiday for back-to-school items, a measure critics called a political gimmick; it failed.

That's got to sting. Good luck running on that record against Mike Coffman.

One small correction, though. Miklosi is a Denver Democrat, not an Aurora Democrat. He has never been elected to anything from Aurora -- he just moved there in February to run for Congress. 

The second, and perhaps more damaging to his campaign, event that occurred this week was The Colorado Observer's uncovering of a back pay complaint against Miklosi by his former campaign finance director. In stiffing his former staffer of pay, Miklosi is setting himself up to be seen as a deadbeat boss. In this economy, or any economy really, that's not an image people see positively. 

To add insult to injury, in the one good piece of news Miklosi got all week -- The Washington Post listing his race as one to watch -- they couldn't even spell his name right. The reason Miklosi's race in CD6 even got mentioned was on paper it should be a close race, but since Miklosi has proved to be such a terrible candidate and Mike Coffman has been a "fundraising machine" it's not considered close to local observers. Making clear the author only took a brief look at the district's voter registration, and not the quality of the candidates themselves, Miklosi's name is misspelled Mikloski. 

Congratulations, Joe Miklosi. You had the worst week in Denver. 

Civil Unions and Labor Unions

by: Dave Diepenbrock

Fri May 11, 2012 at 06:32 59 MST

OBAMA "EVOLVES" AGAIN: Prisoner Keith Judd Forces Obama To Change On Coal...On His Website

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Fri May 11, 2012 at 10:14 54 MST

Obama's "War on Coal" has hit its "evolution" point, with Obama's campaign quietly editing its position on energy overnight. We're sure it had nothing to do with the fact that a prisoner, Keith Judd, took 41% of the Democrat primary vote in West Virginia against Obama last week, a state where Obama's policies have devastated the coal industry. 

Reports The Washington Examiner:

Gay marriage isn't the only issue President Obama "evolved" on this week. This Tuesday we reported that while Obama was traveling around the country touting his "all of the above" energy plan, his website conspicuously left out a fuel source responsible for almost half of all domestic electricity generation: coal.

On the left is an Examiner screenshot from Tuesday. On the right, an Examiner screenshot from today.

Notice how "fuel efficiency" suddenly becomes "clean coal"?

Unlike the manufactured "war on women" the "war on coal" is real and demonstrably so. The Obama administration's new rules for coal plants effectively kill them by setting emission standards for new plants that are impossible to meet. 

The head of the United Mine Workers of America, Cecil Roberts, recently said:

"The Navy SEALs shot Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan and [EPA Administrator] Lisa Jackson shot us in Washington...This rule is an all-out, in my opinion, decision by the EPA that we’re never going to have another coal-fired facility in the United States that’s constructed.” 

Obama's graphic change is only a rhetorical change, he's still not backing off his policy plan to kill the coal industry. Just like Obama's stance on gay marriage, where he won't be pushing any policy, only changing his rhetoric, Obama's coal move is pure politics.

But the American people are smart enough to figure out when words change, but actions don't.

JEFFCO CASH DASH: Republicans In Competitive Legislative Races Outraising Democrat Opponents

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Thu May 10, 2012 at 15:58 21 MST

In the pivotal swing county of Jefferson County, Republicans running in competetive legislative races demonstrated superior fundraising compared to their Democrat opponents in the most recent fundraising period.

Reports filed with the Secretary of State's office show candidates Amy Attwood, Rick Enstrom, Ken Summers and Lang Sias crushing their rivals when it comes to campaign cash. 

Seeing that in tight races Tim Gill's money will fund massive ad buys these candidates' dollars aren't going to win or lose races, but they do provide an important benchmark of the level of excitement and energy present among party donors. In the county that will be targeted from the top of the ticket on down to legislative races, Republicans are running up the score on fundraising.

Considering JeffCo voted against the Prop 103 $3 billion tax hike at a rate of 2-1, supported by Evie Hudak, it's looking like the swing county West of Denver is looking less-and-less likely to be a good place for Democrats in 2012.

In HD28, Attwood has raised $27,460 compared to $13,245 for her competitor, community organizer Brittany Pettersen. Attwood has $22,765 on hand to Pettersen's $10,021. 

In HD23, Enstrom raised $28,462, all of it in the most recent period. His opponent, incumbent Rep. Max "Children Are Like Maggots" Tyler (D-Golden) raised a pitiful $2,380 for the period, and has less than $18,000 on hand. Enstrom has $28,000 on hand. 

In SD22, Rep. Ken Summers (R-Lakewood) raised $7,680 since the end of January, and has over $60,000 on hand. Rep. Andy (D-Lakewood) raised $16,100 for the period, but has less than $30,000 on hand, giving Summers a nearly 2:1 advantage. 

In SD19, Top Gun instructor Lang Sias raised $23,679 compared to incumbent Sen. Evie Hudak (D-Westminster), who raised $11,498. Hudak holds a substantial cash on hand advantage, with $52,784 to Sias's $21,641, but Hudak has also been able to raise funds since 2008, whereas Sias only joined the race in January.

Now that the legislative session is over, the lobbyist cash spigot will be turned on at full force. What is interesting is how much better Republicans were doing in fundraising while lobbyists were barred by law from donating -- though that didn't stop Diane Primavera and Anne McGihon.

(Photo Credit: Golden Landmarks)

DOUBLE STANDARD AT CBS4: Tough Interview For Romney, Softballs For Obama

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Thu May 10, 2012 at 11:12 45 MST

Yesterday, CBS4 had a contentious interview with Mitt Romney, trying to pin him down on a variety of Colorado state political issues. He rightfully pushed back against attempts to trip him up on small issues that don't really matter to the office he is seeking, saying:

"Aren’t there issues of significance you would like to talk about? The economy? The growth of jobs? The need to put people back to work? The challenges of Iran. We’ve got enormous issues we face, but you want to talk about medical marijuana.”

When conservatives complain of media bias this is exactly what they are talking about.

For President Obama, they used a local anchor who clearly knew nothing about politics and proceeded to ask not a single tough policy question. But Romney gets the political reporter who grills him on anything that might possibly trip him up.

Furthermore, whereas Boyd asked Romney questions that CBS4 viewers had requested she ask, Obama's CBS4 interviewer Karen Leigh laughably handed Obama a stack of paper with viewers' questions on it. Instead of asking those questions, Leigh instead lobbed softballs such as "tell us more about this progress your administration's report says you've made."

CBS4, if you want to retain a shred of your credibility or a single conservative viewer, you will learn that you need to have an equal standard in candidate interviews. If Obama gets a softball, Barbara Walters-esque special and Romney gets a grilling, people will stop tuning into your channel. If viewers wanted that type of slant, they can just as easily flip over to MSNBC. 

THE EMPLOYEE FUND: Compass Colorado Helps Joe Miklosi Raise Funds To Pay Staff

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Thu May 10, 2012 at 08:55 44 MST

Conservative advocacy group Compass Colorado launched a billboard campaign in Colorado yesterday highlighting Democrats' energy policy alignment with Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Almost immediately, one of the Democrats targeted, Congressional candidate Joe Miklosi, blasted out a fundraising email about it.

From the email:

Shady outside groups will continue to use their secret slush funds to launch these kinds of wild attacks. We need your help to fight back.  Help us combat Coffman and his far right buddies by giving $100, $50 or $25 or whatever you can today!

Miklosi's campaign cries about being tied to Ahmadinejad, although both oppose expanded oil drilling in the US, albeit for different reasons, but what probably really bothers them is being tied to President Obama. With an approval rating of only 42% in the metro area, Obama is not the type of public figure a little known candidate wants to be associated with.  

Colorado Pols snarkily thanked Compass Colorado for boosting Miklosi's name ID, though if we were Miklosi we wouldn't want our name ID boosted in reference to Obama. But the real person who should be thanking Compass Colorado is Miklosi's former finance director, who is still waiting to be paid in full by Miklosi. 

As Miklosi is a deadbeat boss who doesn't pay his employees their "fair share," if Miklosi raises enough money off the Compass Colorado ad email, we hope he uses the funds to pay the back pay complaint. After all, we're told that's why Compass put the ads up in the first place. They care about Colorado workers. 

BOULDER BANS DRILLING WITH $5 GAS: Will Longmont Join The Anti-Energy Coalition?

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Tue May 08, 2012 at 15:04 30 MST

With gas reaching $4.39/gallon in Colorado, Boulder County stepped up last month to fulfill its role as the capital of tone-deaf liberalism, extending a ban on oil and gas exploration in non-municipal areas. Tonight, Longmont's city council meets to discuss other, illegal drilling bans. Despite Longmont's reputation for being the city of sanity in a county sea of left wing wackos, there is a chance Longmont will join Boulder in their anti-drilling campaign. 

One of the proposed regulations at the city council is a ban on oil and gas drilling in any area zoned as residential. The Attorney General's office says the ban is "unenforceable" as state laws and permitting supersede local rules and regulations. 

Councilman Brian Bagley says he's "not coming from a sky is falling, extreme left, environmentalist prospective" in proposing the ban.

If you vote to ban oil and gas drilling Brian, uh, yes you are. 

These local drilling ban attempts are the latest in the anti-drilling left wing campaign to ban drilling in any way they can. 

Political operative Patrick Davis sums it up nicely in a recent email blast:

TRASHING PAY DISPUTES: Miklosi Campaign Manager On Record Attacking Staffers Seeking Compensation

by: ColoradoPeakPolitics

Tue May 08, 2012 at 10:18 10 MST

Joe Miklosi's campaign manager, Joe Hamill, recently tweeted out an article about former political staffers seeking pay for their work and added a comment about the detrimental effects that would have on their careers. This revelation comes a day after The Colorado Observer reported there is an ongoing pay dispute between Joe Miklosi's Congressional campaign and a former political staffer.

Does Joe Miklosi share Joe Hamill's view about staffers seeking pay? Does he think it's appropriate for a campaign manager working for a campaign embroiled in a labor dispute to be publicly trashing workers seeking back pay?

On April 6, Joe Hamill tweeted this:

With a formal back pay complaint filed against the Miklosi campaign for stiffing the former campaign finance director Kirsten Boyd, it's probably not a legally nor politically smart decision to weigh in publicly on the subject of compensation owed to former employees. 

Since Hamill is the campaign manager, isn't it safe to assume he speaks for the campaign? As The Observer article could easily be named "How Joe Miklosi's campaign gets away with not paying its finance director" it seems fair to say Hamill doesn't think Boyd's back pay complaint is a very smart course of action. 

Joe Miklosi has yet to weigh in on the scandal roiling his campaign, but with his campaign manager dipping his toe into the issue, he might have to clarify his position.